The Court ruled that while it is OK to have limits on how much an individual can give to a single federal candidate — currently $2,600 per election — limiting the number of candidates one can give to in an election cycle violated the First Amendment. Individuals are currently allowed to give a total of no more than $48,600 every two years. That means, for example, they could not give the maximum contribution to all US senators during one election cycle.

Advertisement

A spokesman for the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance said the ruling means the agency will no longer enforce state limits on aggregate giving from individuals to candidates for state, county and local office.

Get Fast Forward in your inbox:

Forget yesterday's news. Get what you need today in this early-morning email.

Individuals are still prohibited from giving more than $500 per year to any one state candidate or their political committee. But, should they choose, donors would now be allowed to give, for example, to every candidate running for every office. Before today, they would have been limited to giving the $500 maximum to 25 candidates each year.

Tait said the agency had not yet made a determination about how the high court’s ruling would impact state aggregate contribution limits to other political entities, such as state parties and political action committees.

In the Court’s opinion accompanying the 5-4 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the overall limits “intrude without justification on a citizen’s ability to exercise ‘the most fundamental First Amendment activities.’”

Advertisement

Opponents of the decision decried a ruling they said would give the wealthy increased — and outsized — influence in politics.

“This decision will dramatically increase the corrupting influence of big money, here in Massachusetts and across the country,” Pam Wilmot, the executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts, said in a statement.

Meanwhile, at least one Democratic candidate wasted little time before deriding the decision in the case, McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission.

Donald M. Berwick, one of five Democrats and 10 candidates running for governor, said in a statement he was “deeply concerned” with the ruling.

“[T]he last thing we need is even more influence concentrated in the hands of the wealthy and well connected,” he said.